TY - JOUR
T1 - Burden and Unmet Needs with Portable Oxygen in Patients on Long-Term Oxygen Therapy
AU - Dakkak, Jessica
AU - Tang, Wilson
AU - Smith, Jonathan T.
AU - Balasubramanian, Aparna
AU - Mattson, Moriah
AU - Ainechi, Ana
AU - Dudley, Brice
AU - Hill, Martha N.
AU - Mathai, Stephen C.
AU - McCormack, Meredith C.
AU - Acharya, Soumyadipta
AU - Danoff, Sonye K.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2021 by the American Thoracic Society
PY - 2021/9
Y1 - 2021/9
N2 - Rationale: Over 1.5 million Americans receive long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) for the treatment of chronic hypoxemia to optimize functional status and quality of life. However, current portable oxygen equipment, including portable gas tanks (GTs), portable liquid tanks (LTs), and portable oxygen concentrators (POCs), each have limitations that can hinder patient mobility and daily activities. Objectives: To examine patient experiences with portable oxygen to guide equipment innovation and thereby improve patient care on oxygen therapy. Methods: The burden and unmet needs with portable oxygen equipment were assessed in 836 LTOT patients with chronic lung disease (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD], interstitial lung disease, and pulmonary hypertension) through an online survey. The survey included a combination of multiple-choice, Likert-scale, short-answer, and open-ended questions. Distribution was achieved through patient support organizations, including the U.S. COPD Coalition, the Pulmonary Fibrosis Foundation, and the Pulmonary Hypertension Association. Results: Improvements in portability were ranked as the highest priority by patients across all equipment types, followed by increases in the duration of oxygen supply for GTs, accessibility for LTs, and flow capabilities for POCs. All device types were found to be burdensome, with the greatest burden among GT users, 51% of whom characterized GT use as “strenuous” or “extremely strenuous” (high burden). POCs ranked as the most common (61%) and least burdensome devices; however, 29% of POC users still reported a high associated burden. Forty-seven percent of POC respondents described using a POC despite it not meeting their oxygen needs to benefit from advantages over alternative equipment. Among non-POC users, limited oxygen flow rate capabilities and cost were the top reasons preventing POC use. Conclusions: Although improvements have been made to portable oxygen equipment, this study highlights the burden that remains and reveals a clear need for advances in technology to improve the functional status and quality of life of portable LTOT users.
AB - Rationale: Over 1.5 million Americans receive long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT) for the treatment of chronic hypoxemia to optimize functional status and quality of life. However, current portable oxygen equipment, including portable gas tanks (GTs), portable liquid tanks (LTs), and portable oxygen concentrators (POCs), each have limitations that can hinder patient mobility and daily activities. Objectives: To examine patient experiences with portable oxygen to guide equipment innovation and thereby improve patient care on oxygen therapy. Methods: The burden and unmet needs with portable oxygen equipment were assessed in 836 LTOT patients with chronic lung disease (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD], interstitial lung disease, and pulmonary hypertension) through an online survey. The survey included a combination of multiple-choice, Likert-scale, short-answer, and open-ended questions. Distribution was achieved through patient support organizations, including the U.S. COPD Coalition, the Pulmonary Fibrosis Foundation, and the Pulmonary Hypertension Association. Results: Improvements in portability were ranked as the highest priority by patients across all equipment types, followed by increases in the duration of oxygen supply for GTs, accessibility for LTs, and flow capabilities for POCs. All device types were found to be burdensome, with the greatest burden among GT users, 51% of whom characterized GT use as “strenuous” or “extremely strenuous” (high burden). POCs ranked as the most common (61%) and least burdensome devices; however, 29% of POC users still reported a high associated burden. Forty-seven percent of POC respondents described using a POC despite it not meeting their oxygen needs to benefit from advantages over alternative equipment. Among non-POC users, limited oxygen flow rate capabilities and cost were the top reasons preventing POC use. Conclusions: Although improvements have been made to portable oxygen equipment, this study highlights the burden that remains and reveals a clear need for advances in technology to improve the functional status and quality of life of portable LTOT users.
KW - Durable medical equipment
KW - Equipment design
KW - Hypoxia
KW - Lung disease
KW - Quality of life
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85114314362&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85114314362&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202005-487OC
DO - 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202005-487OC
M3 - Article
C2 - 33566753
AN - SCOPUS:85114314362
SN - 2329-6933
VL - 18
SP - 1498
EP - 1505
JO - Annals of the American Thoracic Society
JF - Annals of the American Thoracic Society
IS - 9
ER -